LCA TEJAS MK1 & MK1A: News and Discussion

Super Flanker

Aviation and Defence Enthusiast
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2021
Messages
3,742
Likes
7,268
Country flag

On the Malaysian FLIT requirement, could definitely be a hit job as the article professes no element of neutrality, not even a photo of competitors other than the ones it endorses-

Competition Now Between FA-50 Block 20 And M-346FA?
Sources told Defense Security Asia that the tender competition to supply 18 FLIT/LCA aircraft to TUDM is now between the FA-50 Block 20 made by South Korea/ the United States and the Italian company M-346FA.

(DEFENCE SECURITY ASIA) - Ministry of Defense international tender to acquire 18 Fighter Lead-In Trainer/Light Combat Aircraft aircraft (FLIT/LCA) was officially closed on October 6 last year and since that date has begun the task of the appraisal team to determine the winner.

The 18-plane acquisition tender for TUDM, which is expected to cost up to RM4 billion, has attracted several aircraft manufacturers who risked their output aircraft in the tender.

Between six and eight companies are said to have joined the Ministry of Defense's international tender for the FLIT/LCA aircraft Korea Industries Aerospace (KAI), Hindustan Aeronautics Ltd (HAL), Pakistan Aeronautical Complex/Chengdu Aircraft Industry Group and China National Aero-Technology Import & Export Corp (CATIC).

In addition Leonardo's company and Saab Group from Sweden also joined the tender.

As we have seen over the past few weeks, the competition to supply 18 FLIT/LCA aircraft to the RMAF has been fierce, with companies involved offering various exciting deals to Malaysia.

From the offer “final assembly line,” Maintenance, Overhall and Refurbishment (MRO) centers to local production and more.

Although the competition to supply the 18 aircraft is fierce, Defense Security Asia (DSA) has been informed by sources that it is believed that at present two types of FLIT/LCA aircraft are ahead of competition based on some of its "technical strength".

Both planes are FA-50 Block 20 developed by KAI as well as the M-346 FA (Fighter Aircraft) aircraft developed by Leonardo's company.

“It seems that both aircraft are at the forefront of competition due to a number of technical factors and, logically, both aircraft are a safe choice for the Royal Malaysian Air Force (RMAF).”

What is meant to be "safe" by a source of waste?

The "Safe" meant by the source is that both FLIT/LCA aircraft have been used by many countries including regional countries and are a "proven" option, with security within the network of alternatives and existing aid infrastructure.

At this time, the FA-50/TA-50 aircraft other than being used by the South Korean Air Force (about 60) were also used by our neighboring countries such as Thailand, Indonesia and the Philippines.

Whereas for aircraft Leonardo M-346 Furthermore, since 2012 the aircraft has been used by our neighboring country, the Singapore Air Force, in addition to other customers such as the Italian Air Force, Poland and Israel.

The FA-50 and M-346 have reached a certain level of "maturity" that makes customers and their customers feel comfortable using it.

KAI through its local partner has also announced some very interesting offers if Malaysia chooses the FA-50.

In addition to the FA-50 and Leonardo M-346 which enjoyed success in the export market, other aircraft such as Tejas, JF-17 and L-15 Hongdu only used by the country of manufacture and failed to export to the country outside.

While the Hurjet developed by Turkish Aerospace Industries (TAI) is still in prototype condition, the first flight will only take place next year.

The Hurjet was described as a "new baby crawl", according to observers.

For the MiG-35, it was only used by the Russian Air Force in very small numbers at this time, in addition to the claim that it was just a fighter aircraft that had been "rebranded" from the MiG-29 aircraft before.

Whether the TUDM or the Ministry of Defense is at risk of using prototype aircraft or aircraft not used by countries other than the country of manufacture itself?

KAI offers the FA-50 Block 20 aircraft equipped with a variety of advanced equipment such as “Sniper Advance Targeting Pod,” 20mm gun, AIM-9 missile, GBU-12 LGB Integration, GBU-38 JDAM (Joint Direct Attack Munitions) and AGM-65 Maverick missiles.

KAI developed the FA-50 aircraft in collaboration with Lockheed Martin, so it's no wonder we can see the DNA of the US aerospace industry on the fighter aircraft.

In addition, the FA-50 Block 20 will also be equipped with the Air-To-Air Refuelling Probe (AAR Probe) facility for refueling and Link 16 Block Upgrade 2.

The AAR Probe facility will ensure that the FA-50 Block 20 is capable of operating longer and longer.

In addition there are options for future work that can be done in the future as the matter will be upgraded in the current development process by KAI.

Among them, include 300 gallons of External Fuel Tanks and Beyond Visual Range (BVR) capabilities in the form of AIM-120 air-to-air missiles (AMRAAM).

A little more improvement and upgrading, the FA-50 Block II aircraft offered by KAI can already be categorized as MRCA (Multi Role Combat Aircraft) aircraft.

The question of the use of Israeli components by the FA-50 Block 20 is also expected to cause many problems as KAI has committed to replace it with the same components made by the United States and South Korea.

The latest variant of the M-346FA according to Leonardo's company, is designed to provide increased capabilities for the military in the field.

Leonardo said the FA (Fighter Attack) variant was offered to meet the needs MUDM it can be assigned to perform various tasks on combat fields such as ground support including air-to-ground, tactical, close water support (CAS) and counter-insurgency (COIN) missions.

The two engines can also be equipped with smart bullets (precision guided munitions –PGM).

In addition, the M-346FA variant was developed to provide training to pilots, air combat, enforcement and control of airspace and tactical monitoring.

The Leonardo company's two-seater variant of the M-346FA also comes with a digital glass cockpit.

In addition, the aircraft also has LCD multi-function displays, head-up display, night vision goggle (NVG), voice command system, self-protection system, helmet-mounted display (HMD) system, navigation and communication as well as traffic collision avoidance system. - DSA


Ok I am not a Fan of JF 17 but as an Indian I want to say that the author of this Article is claiming that JF 17 has not been exported, whereas JF 17 has been exported to Nigeria and Myanmar, so whoever this author is ,he/she is wrong. Anyways if this Source is to be trusted than that means it's bad news for Tejas ,we had a chance for Export of Tejas to Malaysia and it's gone.
 

Super Flanker

Aviation and Defence Enthusiast
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2021
Messages
3,742
Likes
7,268
Country flag
I have a question here, please help me with This, is Tejas able to Fire any type of BVR? Does Tejas have a gun? Pakis are claiming that Tejas doesn't have Capability to fire BVR and doesn't have a gun. Please explain here.
 

johnj

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2021
Messages
462
Likes
758
Country flag
I have a question here, please help me with This, is Tejas able to Fire any type of BVR? Does Tejas have a gun? Pakis are claiming that Tejas doesn't have Capability to fire BVR and doesn't have a gun. Please explain here.
IOC - no
FOC - bvr yes, guns unknown. bvr missile, derby. i derby er and astra capable
Mk1A - bvr yes, upto 110km, gun yes. bvr missile derby, i derby er. astra capable
MK1A uttam - astra, asraam, r77 erc . gun yes.
 

SwordOfDarkness

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 8, 2021
Messages
1,454
Likes
7,162
Country flag
I have a question here, please help me with This, is Tejas able to Fire any type of BVR? Does Tejas have a gun? Pakis are claiming that Tejas doesn't have Capability to fire BVR and doesn't have a gun. Please explain here.
Gun arrangement is pretty jerry rigged up, added more as an afterthought to the plane. But gun is there, BVR is astra probably. Its supposed to be test fired this year before complete integration.
 

Super Flanker

Aviation and Defence Enthusiast
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2021
Messages
3,742
Likes
7,268
Country flag
IOC - no
FOC - bvr yes, guns unknown. bvr missile, derby. i derby er and astra capable
Mk1A - bvr yes, upto 110km, gun yes. bvr missile derby, i derby er. astra capable
MK1A uttam - astra, asraam, r77 erc . gun yes.
R-77? Didn't the Russians refuse to Integrate R-77 with Tejas Because of Israeli radar? So only the Tejas MK1A having UTTAM will have R-77?
 

Super Flanker

Aviation and Defence Enthusiast
Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2021
Messages
3,742
Likes
7,268
Country flag
Gun arrangement is pretty jerry rigged up, added more as an afterthought to the plane. But gun is there, BVR is astra probably. Its supposed to be test fired this year before complete integration.
BVR will be tested? I can't believe that after all these years Tejas was lacking BVR Capabilities, Look at Pakistan, they already have SD-10/PL-12 BVR Missiles Integrated on their JF 17 Aircrafts and we are not having confirmed BVR on our Tejas. Sad
 

Aditya Ballal

Senior Member
Joined
Dec 16, 2020
Messages
2,512
Likes
14,613
Country flag
BVR will be tested? I can't believe that after all these years Tejas was lacking BVR Capabilities, Look at Pakistan, they already have SD-10/PL-12 BVR Missiles Integrated on their JF 17 Aircrafts and we are not having confirmed BVR on our Tejas. Sad
Mate what is Derby and Derby-ER? All FOC have them integrated and some IOC too have undergone modifications to use BVR missiles during trials. Gsh-23 is fitted on all airframes but is not yet operational as they’re undergoing testing in Nashik right now as per AKMs show.
 

johnj

Regular Member
Joined
Sep 15, 2021
Messages
462
Likes
758
Country flag
Mate what is Derby and Derby-ER? All FOC have them integrated and some IOC too have undergone modifications to use BVR missiles during trials. Gsh-23 is fitted on all airframes but is not yet operational as they’re undergoing testing in Nashik right now as per AKMs show.
derby- old 50km bvr, used by iaf. i derby er - new 100km bvr. Lca mmr is based on israel rf, means it can fire all israel bvr with a minor update. That right, and I hope ADA sort out all issue by 2023/24 when mk1a starts lsp.
Everything looks fine to me in the case of lca foc and mk1a. Eventually all lca gets modified to mk1a standard with uttam rf sensor.
 

Chandragupt Maurya

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
3,332
Likes
8,936
Country flag
View attachment 134051
To give a perspective...
Yes the nose of su30 is bigger than entire Tejas I don’t think any fighter aircraft in the world is this small and it has impressive range for it’s size
It’s impressive that DRDO and HAL has managed to pack GE F404 engine , Fuel tank , refueling probe and a long range AESA radar in such a small aircraft
 
Last edited:

Whitecollar

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
503
Likes
1,900
Country flag
Yes the nose of su30 is bigger than entire Tejas I don’t think any fighter aircraft in the world is this small and it has impressive range for it’s size
It’s impressive that DRDO and HAL has managed to pack GE F404 engine , Fuel tank , refueling , probe a long range AESA radar in such a small aircraft
I still believe we should order atleast 25-30 AIM 120 C-7s as trial basis to be integrated on Tejas. This is mostly because not every customer country might want an Astra or iDerby ER as BVR.
Also, the seeker tech on them could be studied and similar ECCM capabilities could be ported over to Ku band AESA seekera on future Astra MK1s making them further leathal.
 

Chandragupt Maurya

Senior Member
Joined
Jun 23, 2020
Messages
3,332
Likes
8,936
Country flag
I still believe we should order atleast 25-30 AIM 120 C-7s as trial basis to be integrated on Tejas. This is mostly because not every customer country might want an Astra or iDerby ER as BVR.
Also, the seeker tech on them could be studied and similar ECCM capabilities could be ported over to Ku band AESA seekera on future Astra MK1s making them further leathal.
Tejas would be hard to spot in WVR or even in BVR fight because of it’s small size
I was thinking if it was possible to make a stealth aircraft of same size as Tejas with same range
Though carrying heavy air to ground missiles would be difficult for such a small aircraft
 

Whitecollar

Regular Member
Joined
Jan 24, 2021
Messages
503
Likes
1,900
Country flag
Tejas would be hard to spot in WVR or even in BVR fight because of it’s small size
I was thinking if it was possible to make a stealth aircraft of same size as Tejas with same range
At max, you could make the front stealthy. Side and rear can't be helped that much. Plus there's no space for an underbelly storage. Anyways whether or not front aspect is made stealthy, a fully loaded combat ready Tejas's RCS would still be nearly same...

However, this makes Tejas even harder to lock from front aspect...and if intakes are modded to be DSI, you have a winner (MK1B maybe?) which can even surpass current max speed.
But to do such deeds, IAF will have to fully back this platform and promise atleast 100 nos...which seems like distant dream as of now since MK2 is in pipeline already...
 

scatterStorm

Senior Member
Joined
May 28, 2016
Messages
2,165
Likes
5,023
Country flag
BS.

If IAF gets their head out of their a$$ and gives decent orders then production, ecosystem etc will take care of itself. Remember all HAL had before March 2021 was 16+16+8 orders, what kind of production capacity would you expect for such pitiful orders? 4-5/year is about all you can really expect.

The stupid games IAF has played with LCA is why Coke 2025 PAF will have 200+ JF-17 in service and will be onto the blk 3 whilst they are only up to 45 or so LCA and forced to still be flying the MIG-21.

I’ve been listening to the blue skies podcast that has detailed the LCA project using accounts from insiders (test pilots) and the picture they paint is pretty clear. One of them even mentioned that when he joined the test team the feeling within the IAF and LCA project was the LCA was merely a tech demonstrator.

one thing that podcast makes clear is IAF are perhaps the best customers in the world. They can create ASQRs like no one else but they are totally out of their depth when it comes to developing a product.

even with the MK1A what were they arguing about for 2 years between 2019 and the contract signature? They could’ve placed the contract a year earlier and they’d only have to wait another 12 months or so for the first MK1As to come online.

play stupid games, win stupid prizes

same stupidity is going to play out with LCA MK.2 but somehow it will be HAL/ADA’s fault, anyone but the IAF’s of course.
Agreed, but you have to consider that Tejas was supposed to be tech demonstrator, later, much newer platform would've been built by learning from it. We can't just blame IAF here, when it comes to "reliability" (although reliability is tough nugget to eat if you stretch it for too much, example Mig 21Bs), LCA wasn't ready because the armaments weren't ready yet, its in year 21 when we saw FOC. Hate to brake it you, but radar and armaments is as crucial as an engine, we don't want our pilots to fire R73 duds, where our piolet has to go near an F16 and fire it to bring it down, and also almost loose there life.

A product can only be better, if the tech and product runway are both aligned. Tejas was plagued by funding from the start, not to mention sanctions. IAF for the better part is lollygagging still. They would accept the product like any other good or best product if they stand head to head with the best if not better. They don't want a jet which doesn't come equipped with an AESA + SAR, AIM120D level or much better, meteor level of NEZ, Spectra like SPJs and NATO's Link 16 like awareness.

However, IAF is now playing politics much better, because to this day, IA or Navy have much better part of defense budget, so they are like, alright... you asked us to spend wisely so we will buy wisely, not invest wisely because you didn't allowed us to save much.
 

scatterStorm

Senior Member
Joined
May 28, 2016
Messages
2,165
Likes
5,023
Country flag
BVR will be tested? I can't believe that after all these years Tejas was lacking BVR Capabilities, Look at Pakistan, they already have SD-10/PL-12 BVR Missiles Integrated on their JF 17 Aircrafts and we are not having confirmed BVR on our Tejas. Sad
PAF isn't building there jet by there own. Its geopolitics at its best, Chinese will continue to supply them weapons much like what US does, "arms diplomacy". This never ending battle won't come to an end unless we takeover PAK completely, because whosoever comes to power, will ensure that our north or god-damn whole country be in flames constantly, so that they will continue to milk there military industrial complex.

Yes, we are goodness-darn late, but with newer avionics, I can bet JF-17 would be a nice target practice.
We have a radar that can do SAR, there B3 (correct me if I am wrong) can't do even passive SAR, and our UTTAM can do active SAR.

What we lack is armaments, PL-10E and PL-15 are there, its now a reality that our piolets have to face if they were called in to hammer them. So it up to DRDO to build a VLR-A2A with a NEZ of much like Meteor quickly. Because a 200 JF 17 can give terrorist-state to wet-dream again of Gwaza-e-hind, atlhough we all know its a deterrence measure.

I would like to quote our past air chief marshal words here once he gave an interview to a fairly shitty interview back then post balakot incident, he said in his excessive hubris,

"Humare pass 200 MKIs hai, agar PAK airspace key uper sai guzar gaye to pura PAK would be in flames".


Now, they will have 200 in strength, will be a good deterrence, because if we were to war-fight them in future, say we hit them first, they will do again a "swift-fart" then they can damage our Northern Sectors very much, or make them completely useless, because we can't turnaround 200 fighters at North that fast.
 

shiphone

Senior Member
Joined
Nov 9, 2009
Messages
2,103
Likes
2,328
Country flag
what is the so called SAR for? or SAR mode of a airborne FC radar?
and ‘do Passive SAR’ ?how?

...lol
 
Last edited:

Articles

Top